IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 421 of 2008()
1. JOSEPH K.GEORGE, S/O GEORGE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :27/05/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C No.421 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2008
ORDER
Petitioner is the 5th accused in a prosecution for offences
punishable, inter alia, under Sections 409 and 420 r/w 34 I.P.C.
Crime was registered in 2001. Final report was filed in 2004. The
petitioner has already entered appearance before the court. The
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations
against the petitioner are totally unjustified and there is
absolutely no material on which the allegation can be founded. In
these circumstances the learned counsel for the petitioner prays
that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to quash
the proceedings against the petitioner.
2. I take note that altogether there are 5 accused
persons. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2004. I am not
persuaded to agree that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can
or ought to be invoked in favour of the petitioner at this stage. I
am satisfied that the interests of justice will be served ideally by
directing the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate
and claim premature termination of proceedings against him by
discharge at the stage of Section 239/240 Cr.P.C.
3. Premature termination of criminal proceedings against
an indictee can be achieved by resorting to the ordinary
Crl.M.C No.421 of 2008 2
procedure of Criminal Procedure Code. It is not necessary in
every such case for this Court to invoke the powers under Section
482 Cr.P.C. Normally and ordinarily, an indictee claiming
premature termination of proceedings must resort to the ordinary
provisions available under the Code. Moreover considering the
fact that there are plurality of accused and that cognizance has
been taken as early as in 2004, I take the view that the petitioner
can be directed to appear before the learned Magistrate and
claim discharge. I find no satisfactory reason to invoke the
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. The
petitioner can appear before the learned Magistrate through
counsel within a period of 30 days from this date and if he so
appears, the learned Magistrate shall consider his plea of
discharge without insisting on the personal presence of the
petitioner. He shall be permitted to be represented by his counsel
till a decision is taken on the question of charge/discharge under
Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. Only if the court decides to proceed
further against the petitioner can and need the personal presence
of the petitioner be insisted.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
Crl.M.C No.421 of 2008 3